In reply to that Iginla could have said " Pitt or stay here" knowing Calgary wanted assets back before he goes to free agency.

He held all the cards.

Not on Wednesday he didnt. If this trade deadline minusone hour, then sure. But there was still time to show Iginla that he was exploiting an albeit massive oversight on the part of the team that he has given his heart and soul to for 16 years and not exhibiting any kind of good faith.

This ended before it should have ended.

Drew, that's the surest sign that Iginla held all the cards. Clearly, Feaster had time left to go back to PC and ask im to up his offer if he was interested in acquiring Iginla. Feaster had another week to negotiate with teams if he chose to. Why didn't this happen? It's because Iginla decided on Pitt and Feaster was left with the choice of keeping him or accepting what Pitt had to offer. He decided to deal him. End of story.

[/QUOTE]

He had time left to convince Iginla that Iginla was being unreasonable.

Not on Wednesday he didnt. If this trade deadline minusone hour, then sure. But there was still time to show Iginla that he was exploiting an albeit massive oversight on the part of the team that he has given his heart and soul to for 16 years and not exhibiting any kind of good faith.

This ended before it should have ended.

Drew, that's the surest sign that Iginla held all the cards. Clearly, Feaster had time left to go back to PC and ask im to up his offer if he was interested in acquiring Iginla. Feaster had another week to negotiate with teams if he chose to. Why didn't this happen? It's because Iginla decided on Pitt and Feaster was left with the choice of keeping him or accepting what Pitt had to offer. He decided to deal him. End of story.

He had time left to convince Iginla that Iginla was being unreasonable.

[/QUOTE]

I don't think Iginla was that unreasonable though Drew. He had a NMC. It was his right to veto any move. I'm not pleased he did it but I don't blame him.

You're leaving a lot out nas. It is "Iginla's place" if that's what he negotiated, and he obviously did that in the last little while.

If Feaster plays hardball, as you say would've been so easy, he could have done that, and kept some credibility within the industry by sending Jerome to the Bruins.

Don't you think that would be a much more appealing option to Feaster than what actually went down?

There's also the very stark reality, that if Jerome doesn't go where he wants to go....he merely sticks around for another 3 weeks, and the Flames get zero. Nothing.

Calgary has already stated they're through with Jerome Iginla, and that kind of news never endears an athlete to his lifelong employer.

Iginla's contract called for him to have approval on any movement. It did not call for him to review all offers made to the Flames for him.

Given the opportunity to chase the Cup with Boston or surely be golfing again, Iginla would have chosen Boston.

Correct. He didnt have to present Pitt as on option. He should have presented it as Boston or no trade. And if Iginla asked if Pitt was an option, Feaster should have said no (assuming he liked the Bos offer better). He should have said no even if Pitt actually was an option. Its called a bluff.

Call it negotiating strategy/savvy/competency. Feaster displayed a lack of it.

[/QUOTE]

No it's not. We have no idea whether Iginla negotiated that nugget, when he opened up the no movement thing. It's also of no consequence.

What we do have is enough information to make an informed judgement. We know Iginla doesn't have to go anywhere. He can ultimately choose his destination. Unless those locales are legalized, everything is just on the honour system.

We know Crosby was in on things, so Iginla knew the Penguins were in the hunt. Feaster can't bluff that. It's a certainty Iginla was told he was traded to Boston. That's when he started flexing his muscles. Obviously, Iginla then said he decided he wasn't interested in going to Boston, and since he already knew Pittsburgh wanted him, he merely stated Pittsburgh or nothing. Since the flames knew "legally", Jerome had them by the short hairs, they went in to spin mode.

Look, everything you guys are saying IS TURE - Based on two sucka$$ offers, it's obvious Iginla was going to Pitt and it was the players decision. Thats only true when you view thecircumstances inside that vacuum of everything being equal - it shouldn't have been equal when the real possibility of that was in play, cause you were going to lose that battle everytime. Didn't anyone consider that a possibility? That's the real issue imo.

I believe if PC offered for example a 1st, krug and Caron - then Iginla never gets the Pitt offer, and he's dressing tomorrow in black and gold. PC went in on the cheap and tried to protect as many assests as he could, which is admirable in most deals - NOT THIS ONE. The fact is that Iginla is going to Pitt fro two college prospects and we offered to dump Matt Bartkowski into their laps to get the deal done. Wow, the Bruins offer was significantly better ? Give me a break - Who would want that ? Now the Pitt offer is on the table - and bang. What a shocker ! Jarome went to Pitt and we held onto Caron, Krug Bartkowski. That's a good job? OK- Different opinions are fine, and that's mine.

So you're saying the "KEY" is the fact that a better offer "wouldn't" have been discussed with Iginla, and that would have made all the difference? Do you really feel Feaster talked this over with Iginla as a mere courtesy? Isn't it more reasonable to assume he only figured that out after he gave the Bruins his word their deal was approved ?

You're hanging your hat on that one small piece of conjecture when there are several more that should point you in a different direction? Sure you're entitled to your opinion, but you should be open to changing it too.

If it wasn't common knowledge that Pittsburgh already decided the Bruins offer was good enough, and told them they had a deal, your theory would make a lot of sense. Knowing those 2 facts though, makes it incredibly far fetched. You present as fact, the pieces being offerred by Boston to be a joke, yet you refuse to understand the Penguins didn't see them that way at all. They saw them as ample return, and agreed on the deal. No one in pro hockey is arguing that, so it should be considered factual.

There's much more.

Do you realize just how demeaning it is to be Jay Feaster these days? These guys will go to pretty much any extreme to avoid looking as dumb as this guy does right now. You really think he figures he could have avoided that by merely "not discussing the deal with Jerome". If so, why did he do it in the first place. That would make him even dumber than he is now.

And there's the whole "sweepstakes" process. If the Bruins woulda/coulda offerred up more, so would have the Penguins. So would have anyone else. Even a terrible GM would be hard pressed to screw up that option. The only reason that option wasn't excercised, was because it wasn't available. That's pretty clear.

Iginla didn't have to be dealt in the middle of the night Thursday for a group of players you consider junk(me too). The reason that happened is obvious. Feaster had no other options. It was Pittsburgh or nowhere, otherwise he'd of got back on the phone and said something like, "sorry Pete, I know I said we have a deal, but I got a better one, and ownership trumped me,,if you want him ya got to do better". After that call, Feaster would dial any other interested party to keep things going. Sure, that's greasy, but less greasy than what he ultimately did.

Listen we disagree on the deciding factors, and I'm not changing my mind. I appreciate the discussion, but we're at a dead end with this. I think the offer had an impact on the decision, and you're basically saying it didn't matter what so ever, which I feel is a naive viewpoint.

Do you believe that no matter what Boston offered that He was going to Pitt regardless ?

If the answer is no, as I believe - then the question becomes why wasn't the best offer made ?

And please don't tell me that any offer including Matt Bartkowski was significantly better than a bag of pucks-

Not on Wednesday he didnt. If this trade deadline minusone hour, then sure. But there was still time to show Iginla that he was exploiting an albeit massive oversight on the part of the team that he has given his heart and soul to for 16 years and not exhibiting any kind of good faith.

This ended before it should have ended.

[/QUOTE]

He held the cards from the time he signed this contract till it the day it ends. Why does when matter ?

In reply to that Iginla could have said " Pitt or stay here" knowing Calgary wanted assets back before he goes to free agency.

He held all the cards.

Not on Wednesday he didnt. If this trade deadline minusone hour, then sure. But there was still time to show Iginla that he was exploiting an albeit massive oversight on the part of the team that he has given his heart and soul to for 16 years and not exhibiting any kind of good faith.

This ended before it should have ended.

Drew, that's the surest sign that Iginla held all the cards. Clearly, Feaster had time left to go back to PC and ask im to up his offer if he was interested in acquiring Iginla. Feaster had another week to negotiate with teams if he chose to. Why didn't this happen? It's because Iginla decided on Pitt and Feaster was left with the choice of keeping him or accepting what Pitt had to offer. He decided to deal him. End of story.

He had time left to convince Iginla that Iginla was being unreasonable.

I don't think Iginla was that unreasonable though Drew. He had a NMC. It was his right to veto any move. I'm not pleased he did it but I don't blame him.

[/QUOTE]

He agreed to a list of teams that he would go to. Then changed his mind and forced his GM to accept a trade for a weaker package.

He went back on his word

He made Calgary, a city that loved him for 16 years, take a weaker offer

He made a fool out of his GM

The degree to which he was being unreasonable is irrelevant. Feaster could have and should have presented a case to Iginla that made Iginla feel like Iginla was not acting in good faith.

Even if Iginla wasnt being that unreasonable in your opinion (and I can honestly see where you are coming from. A lot had changed since he made that list, and he could have said, "Im sorry for doing this...I honestly do feel bad about it...I made that list in haste and I just completely regret putting Boston on it")...Still, Feaster should have attempted to sell the arguement that going to Bos was the right thing to do because Iginla had made that list. He could have (as Nas points out) bluffed and said Bos or nowhere.

Honestly Dez, Im not particularly upset that we didnt get Iginla. Im just honestly shocked at Feaster's lack of business sense / negotiation competency. That, and only that, is what I cant let go of.

How the heck did this guy even become a GM? It seems like he's never taken a negotiation class in his life!!!

While it does appear that Iginla held all of the cards, I can't understand why Feaster let it play out that way. A NMC does not mean the player gets to be GM and review the offers.

A GM with some tact might have asked Iginla for his list of teams and then ended the player's involvement there, which is perfectly reasonable (the norm, I would say). "You're willing to go to three teams Jerome? Great. I'll get back to you."

Then Feaster does his job, which is getting the best return for his team. If he thinks the Bruins offer was best, and he's admitted that he did, then he goes back to Iginla and says "Nobody is matching the Bruins deal, good luck in Boston".

Instead, he apparently came back and let Iginla play GM. It's just puzzling.

You're leaving a lot out nas. It is "Iginla's place" if that's what he negotiated, and he obviously did that in the last little while.

If Feaster plays hardball, as you say would've been so easy, he could have done that, and kept some credibility within the industry by sending Jerome to the Bruins.

Don't you think that would be a much more appealing option to Feaster than what actually went down?

There's also the very stark reality, that if Jerome doesn't go where he wants to go....he merely sticks around for another 3 weeks, and the Flames get zero. Nothing.

Calgary has already stated they're through with Jerome Iginla, and that kind of news never endears an athlete to his lifelong employer.

Iginla's contract called for him to have approval on any movement. It did not call for him to review all offers made to the Flames for him.

Given the opportunity to chase the Cup with Boston or surely be golfing again, Iginla would have chosen Boston.

Correct. He didnt have to present Pitt as on option. He should have presented it as Boston or no trade. And if Iginla asked if Pitt was an option, Feaster should have said no (assuming he liked the Bos offer better). He should have said no even if Pitt actually was an option. Its called a bluff.

Call it negotiating strategy/savvy/competency. Feaster displayed a lack of it.

No it's not. We have no idea whether Iginla negotiated that nugget, when he opened up the no movement thing. It's also of no consequence.

What we do have is enough information to make an informed judgement. We know Iginla doesn't have to go anywhere. He can ultimately choose his destination. Unless those locales are legalized, everything is just on the honour system.

We know Crosby was in on things, so Iginla knew the Penguins were in the hunt. Feaster can't bluff that. It's a certainty Iginla was told he was traded to Boston. That's when he started flexing his muscles. Obviously, Iginla then said he decided he wasn't interested in going to Boston, and since he already knew Pittsburgh wanted him, he merely stated Pittsburgh or nothing. Since the flames knew "legally", Jerome had them by the short hairs, they went in to spin mode.

[/QUOTE]

Fine. Even if he couldnt bluff that Pitt wasnt an option he could have bluffed that he wasnt going to accomodate Iginla out of spite. And that Iginlas options were stay (where he would be demoted to third line duty) or leave.

He could bluff that he would tarnish Iginla's legacy and thrash him in the media for disregarding "the honor system" (which is a powerful thing in the NHL universe). Cal did have some chips. Sure they were chips that didnt want to play, but they had chips and could have bluffed that they would use them if need be.

"I dont want to have to show everyone and all of your fans how you are going back on your word and forcing us to take a weaker offer. Please dont make me play this card."

Do you believe that no matter what Boston offered that He was going to Pitt regardless ?

If the answer is no, as I believe - then the question becomes why wasn't the best offer made ?

And please don't tell me that any offer including Matt Bartkowski was significantly better than a bag of pucks-

thats ridiculous.

Bartkowski was the least significant part of the deal from the Bruins, but he's a LOT better than the 2 college stiff they are getting from the Penguins. Koko and the 1st round pick were the meat and potatoes of the deal.

For a 35 yo rental I think that's a premium offer, I really do. Enough of a good offer that it should have trumped Iginla's wishes. Offering a first born child with that deal would have been foolish.

Iginla did not hold all the cards. Calgary is being honorable and not playing the card they have. I wouldnt be so honarble. If I owned the Flames, today on Flames.com would be an acknowledgement from ownership that not having Iginla agree in writing to a list of teams was a mistake. An apology from ownership for misplaying their hand. And then a complete and utter thrashing of Iginla for going back on his word and strongarming the organization to take a weaker offer. I would then promise that we will do everything possible to win a cup.

I would dig up all the dirt I could. It would be full blown war. And Calgary ownership would win. Iginla isnt there to defend himself anymore, but Cal ownership is there to ruin his legacy.

I would dig up every piece of dirt I could on him. Maybe he grabbed a woman's butt one time in a bar. I would promise to not retire his number.

ANd (as an added bonus) you may be able to win some fans back. By making Iginla public enemy #1.

Not on Wednesday he didnt. If this trade deadline minusone hour, then sure. But there was still time to show Iginla that he was exploiting an albeit massive oversight on the part of the team that he has given his heart and soul to for 16 years and not exhibiting any kind of good faith.

This ended before it should have ended.

He held the cards from the time he signed this contract till it the day it ends. Why does when matter ?

[/QUOTE]

Because there was no reason to concede defeat until your options were down to a) trade Iginla to Pitt or b) hold him until the end of the season and not get anything for him.

When Iginla was traded option "c" still existed. Optoin C: Convince Iginla that going to Boston was the honrable thing to do considering he already agreed and threaten that you are going to expose his lack of honor to the fans if he continues to refuse.

Iginla did not hold all the cards. Calgary is being honorable and not playing the card they have. I wouldnt be so honarble. If I owned the Flames, today on Flames.com would be an acknowledgement from ownership that not having Iginla agree in writing to a list of teams was a mistake. An apology from ownership for misplaying their hand. And then a complete and utter thrashing of Iginla for going back on his word and strongarming the organization to take a weaker offer. I would then promise that we will do everything possible to win a cup.

I would dig up all the dirt I could. It would be full blown war. And Calgary ownership would win. Iginla isnt there to defend himself anymore, but Cal ownership is there to ruin his legacy.

I would dig up every piece of dirt I could on him. Maybe he grabbed a woman's butt one time in a bar. I would promise to not retire his number.

ANd (as an added bonus) you may be able to win some fans back. By making Iginla public enemy #1.

I would have let things go sour before I agreed to this.

And if Calgary ownership did this, they would be portrayed as the biggest idiots in sports history.

Iginla did not hold all the cards. Calgary is being honorable and not playing the card they have. I wouldnt be so honarble. If I owned the Flames, today on Flames.com would be an acknowledgement from ownership that not having Iginla agree in writing to a list of teams was a mistake. An apology from ownership for misplaying their hand. And then a complete and utter thrashing of Iginla for going back on his word and strongarming the organization to take a weaker offer. I would then promise that we will do everything possible to win a cup.

I would dig up all the dirt I could. It would be full blown war. And Calgary ownership would win. Iginla isnt there to defend himself anymore, but Cal ownership is there to ruin his legacy.

I would dig up every piece of dirt I could on him. Maybe he grabbed a woman's butt one time in a bar. I would promise to not retire his number.

ANd (as an added bonus) you may be able to win some fans back. By making Iginla public enemy #1.

I would have let things go sour before I agreed to this.

And if Calgary ownership did this, they would be portrayed as the biggest idiots in sports history.

Iginla did not hold all the cards. Calgary is being honorable and not playing the card they have. I wouldnt be so honarble. If I owned the Flames, today on Flames.com would be an acknowledgement from ownership that not having Iginla agree in writing to a list of teams was a mistake. An apology from ownership for misplaying their hand. And then a complete and utter thrashing of Iginla for going back on his word and strongarming the organization to take a weaker offer. I would then promise that we will do everything possible to win a cup.

I would dig up all the dirt I could. It would be full blown war. And Calgary ownership would win. Iginla isnt there to defend himself anymore, but Cal ownership is there to ruin his legacy.

I would dig up every piece of dirt I could on him. Maybe he grabbed a woman's butt one time in a bar. I would promise to not retire his number.

ANd (as an added bonus) you may be able to win some fans back. By making Iginla public enemy #1.

I would have let things go sour before I agreed to this.

And if Calgary ownership did this, they would be portrayed as the biggest idiots in sports history.

And they didnt have to do this. But its a card that they could have played. They could have, if nothing else, exposed this card and then said: out of good faith, we wont do this. Now how about some good faith back?

Look, everything you guys are saying IS TURE - Based on two sucka$$ offers, it's obvious Iginla was going to Pitt and it was the players decision. Thats only true when you view thecircumstances inside that vacuum of everything being equal - it shouldn't have been equal when the real possibility of that was in play, cause you were going to lose that battle everytime. Didn't anyone consider that a possibility? That's the real issue imo.

I believe if PC offered for example a 1st, krug and Caron - then Iginla never gets the Pitt offer, and he's dressing tomorrow in black and gold. PC went in on the cheap and tried to protect as many assests as he could, which is admirable in most deals - NOT THIS ONE. The fact is that Iginla is going to Pitt fro two college prospects and we offered to dump Matt Bartkowski into their laps to get the deal done. Wow, the Bruins offer was significantly better ? Give me a break - Who would want that ? Now the Pitt offer is on the table - and bang. What a shocker ! Jarome went to Pitt and we held onto Caron, Krug Bartkowski. That's a good job? OK- Different opinions are fine, and that's mine.

So you're saying the "KEY" is the fact that a better offer "wouldn't" have been discussed with Iginla, and that would have made all the difference? Do you really feel Feaster talked this over with Iginla as a mere courtesy? Isn't it more reasonable to assume he only figured that out after he gave the Bruins his word their deal was approved ?

You're hanging your hat on that one small piece of conjecture when there are several more that should point you in a different direction? Sure you're entitled to your opinion, but you should be open to changing it too.

If it wasn't common knowledge that Pittsburgh already decided the Bruins offer was good enough, and told them they had a deal, your theory would make a lot of sense. Knowing those 2 facts though, makes it incredibly far fetched. You present as fact, the pieces being offerred by Boston to be a joke, yet you refuse to understand the Penguins didn't see them that way at all. They saw them as ample return, and agreed on the deal. No one in pro hockey is arguing that, so it should be considered factual.

There's much more.

Do you realize just how demeaning it is to be Jay Feaster these days? These guys will go to pretty much any extreme to avoid looking as dumb as this guy does right now. You really think he figures he could have avoided that by merely "not discussing the deal with Jerome". If so, why did he do it in the first place. That would make him even dumber than he is now.

And there's the whole "sweepstakes" process. If the Bruins woulda/coulda offerred up more, so would have the Penguins. So would have anyone else. Even a terrible GM would be hard pressed to screw up that option. The only reason that option wasn't excercised, was because it wasn't available. That's pretty clear.

Iginla didn't have to be dealt in the middle of the night Thursday for a group of players you consider junk(me too). The reason that happened is obvious. Feaster had no other options. It was Pittsburgh or nowhere, otherwise he'd of got back on the phone and said something like, "sorry Pete, I know I said we have a deal, but I got a better one, and ownership trumped me,,if you want him ya got to do better". After that call, Feaster would dial any other interested party to keep things going. Sure, that's greasy, but less greasy than what he ultimately did.

Listen we disagree on the deciding factors, and I'm not changing my mind. I appreciate the discussion, but we're at a dead end with this. I think the offer had an impact on the decision, and you're basically saying it didn't matter what so ever, which I feel is a naive viewpoint.

Do you believe that no matter what Boston offered that He was going to Pitt regardless ?

If the answer is no, as I believe - then the question becomes why wasn't the best offer made ?

And please don't tell me that any offer including Matt Bartkowski was significantly better than a bag of pucks-

thats ridiculous.

You're going down a slippery road from a discussion perspective. If you're not open to changing your mind, what are you doing here? Just re-reading your own posts? I've offered up many reasons for my position, and the only thing you can do is post around them and sling mud.

Please explain what you think would have been different if Boston had included 2 more decent prospects, or whatever it is you're suggesting. Please explain why that would have made Feaster more secretive. Please explain how that would've motivated Iginla or how that would have kept the Crosby stuff in the dark.

As far as why the best offer wasn't made, I don't know where to start. It was the best offer. It was accepted by the Flames. Calgary didn't turn it down, Iginla did. Unless the Flames could provide some under the table incentive for Iginla to accept Boston(which is highly illegal) in the event PC was prepared to include Seguin, what difference would that make to Iginla. Do you really think he gives a shiitt about the Calgary Flames today?

And Bartowski has proven good enough to have a look at the NHL level. That's a far cry from an unsigned US college hockey player. A Boston first rounder is a better pick than a Penguin first rounder too.

And they didnt have to do this. But its a card that they could have played. They could have, if nothing else, exposed this card and then said: out of good faith, we wont do this. Now how about some good faith back?

Just a complete lack of fight on Calgary's part.

[/QUOTE]

In the history of sports, how many times do you think a tactic like threatening to smear a tradeable player's name in public has been used if he didn't agree to a trade ?

Don't you think NHL and NHLPA would have something to say about this ?